About

Jacob Rieker is an Assistant Research Professor of Applied Linguistics at The Pennsylvania State University. He is a researcher and language teacher educator specializing in English for Specific Purposes and English as a Medium of Instruction. His teaching experience includes English for English-Medium Instruction Faculty, International Teaching Assistants, Hospitality English, and English for Academic Purposes, as well as graduate courses in Applied Linguistics and English Language Teacher Education. Rieker’s work emphasizes the development and implementation of responsive, context-sensitive pedagogy. His research interests include language teacher education, second language pedagogy, and English for Specific Purposes, with a particular focus on faculty professional development in English-Medium Instruction contexts. He engages Vygotskian Sociocultural Theory in his pedagogy and publications to promote and document teacher and faculty development. His scholarly work has been published in various venues, including the Journal of English-Medium Instruction, Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, Second Language Teacher Education, and others. Rieker holds a Ph.D. in Applied Linguistics from The Pennsylvania State University, an M.A. in TESOL from the University of Central Florida, and a B.A. in Linguistics and East Asian Languages, Chinese, from the University of Florida.

Research topics

• Computer Science
• Sociology
• Pedagogy
• Psychology
• Mathematics education
• Political Science
• Aesthetics
• Social psychology
• Art
• Epistemology
• Engineering ethics
• Philosophy
• Visual arts

Selected publications

• Journal of English-Medium Instruction | Special Issue Call for Papers - Mobilizing knowledge to catalyze change in EMI: A call for intervention

  2026-01-01

  articleOpen access
  PublisherDOI

• Axes of motion: provoking shifts towards conceptual understandings of English prepositions as spatiotemporal relations

  Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching · 2026-03-13

  articleOpen accessSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Enhancing engagement and performance through a Formative-Linked Exam Weighting (FLEX) assessment

  Studies In Educational Evaluation · 2026-03-11

  articleOpen access

  Conventional grading in higher education assigns fixed weights to different assessment components, remaining unchanged across time and students, and offering limited flexibility to reflect individual learning trajectories. This study introduces a gamification-inspired assessment design termed Formative-Linked Exam Weighting (FLEX), integrated with Rhythmic Engagement Pedagogy (REP), where each student’s final exam initially carries 100% of the grade and is gradually reduced according to learning-progress points accumulated from formative components, such as quizzes, group tasks, flipped sessions, and inquiry-based milestones. Implemented in an 18-week undergraduate Circuit Theory course, the approach individualized exam weights; by semester’s end, the quartiles were 18.7%, 32.5%, and 44.7%. Compared with fixed-weight formats, FLEX increased voluntary attendance, reduced withdrawals, and improved exam outcomes. Correlation analyses showed that formative engagement aligned with professional-content mastery, REP sustained participation across scales, and FLEX supported learner autonomy. Thus, the proposed assessment provides a scalable framework for enhancing engagement and learning performance. • Formative-Linked Exam Weighting (FLEX) redefines the conventional fixed-weight grading. • FLEX uses internal gamification, converting formative progress into grade rewards. • Rhythmic Engagement Pedagogy (REP) structures alternating learning contrasts. • Combined DGS–REP model sustains engagement and reduces course withdrawals. • The approach enhances mastery, autonomy, and motivation in EMI STEM instruction.

  PublisherDOI

• 16 Examining the Role of Language Teacher Educator Intentionality in Leveraging Novice Teacher Emotions as Sites for Professional Development: A Vygotskian Sociocultural Theoretical Perspective

  Multilingual Matters eBooks · 2025-06-20

  book-chapter1st authorCorresponding

  16 Examining the Role of Language Teacher Educator Intentionality in Leveraging Novice Teacher Emotions as Sites for Professional Development: A Vygotskian Sociocultural Theoretical Perspective was published in Teacher Emotions as Personal and Professional Development in Applied Linguistics on page 280.

  PublisherDOI

• Crisis! Commentary on “synergies” in second language acquisition and teaching (SLA/T) and how the field may advance

  Modern Language Journal · 2025-11-10 · 7 citations

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the special synergies issue on SLA/T (Atkinson et al., MLJ 2025 Supplement). Given length limitations we will restrict our commentary to what we believe to be a crucial matter evidenced by the special issue (SI), namely that it, along with other dialogues in the field (e.g., Douglas Fir Group, 2016; Hulstijn et al., 2014, 2015) are indicative of a crisis in SLA/T. This is not the same type of crisis that results in Kuhnian scientific revolutions (Kuhn, 1962). For one thing, we do not believe there is a dominant paradigm in SLA/T and, for another, Kuhn doubted that his analysis applied to the social sciences (Sturm & Mühlberger, 2013). The crisis that we perceive in SLA/T is akin to the crises that have plagued psychology virtually from its inception at the end of the 19th century. Diagnosing a crisis is an essential first step for SLA/T to move forward as a scientific discipline. Moreover, given the interrelation of SLA theory and research with language education (the T in SLA/T), responding to the crisis holds consequences for language teachers and learners. While SLA/T is traditionally considered to have originated in applied linguistics, in our opinion, it has much more in common with contemporary psychology, given its interest in process as well as its preferred research methods. As background, we will briefly explain the nature of the crisis in psychology in order to inform our contention that SLA/T is also in a state of crisis as manifested in the SI and the other SLA publications cited above. In so doing, we will focus on some, though by no means all, of the indicators of a crisis. Finally, we will suggest a possible way out of the crisis that would open the way for significant progress. According to Sturm and Mühlberger (2013) a field can be in a crisis with or without overt acknowledgement of such a state of affairs. While most crisis declarations in psychology highlight the proliferation of theories, they also point to the lack of terminological agreement as well as differences in research and analytical methods (Pléh, 1988). Indeed, Bakan (1995, p. 337) described psychology as a collection of “unrelated molecules” that has yielded interesting findings and ideas but with no coherence resulting in “negligible growth of understanding of mind.” Theory proliferation has been a concern of SLA researchers such as Long (1993), who argued for the need to formulate guidelines (see Jordan, 2004) to reduce the number of theories to a level at which the field could eventually settle into normal science activity (Kuhn, 1962). The field also lacks agreement on key terminology across its various theories, as well as a worry about how to deal with the perceived research/practice divide. We point out, following Sturm and Mühlberger (2013 ), that while a crisis seems to indicate a negative state of affairs, it also presents an opportunity for a field to develop. These authors mention, for instance, that the Chinese word for crisis (危机) consists of two characters, the first signaling danger and the second opportunity. Bühler (1927) described an early crisis as an Aufbaukrise (a construction/building crisis), implying a possibility of building something new out of the situation (Pléh, 1988). In psychology and in SLA/T a crisis is a sign that something is not functioning well, but at the same time it indeed presents an opportunity to improve the situation and move the field in a positive direction. Even though they did not overtly acknowledge a crisis, in their attempt to find common ground the contributors must have had some sense that all is not well in SLA/T. Finding common ground without addressing the differences and incommensurabilities among the various theories is an unsatisfactory way to resolve any crisis. A particularly useful approach to analyzing the crisis in psychology is provided by Yurevich (2009), which we believe also applies to SLA/T. Yurevich characterized the crisis as ruptures along three dimensions. The first, a horizontal rupture, reflects the unacceptable number of theories, schools, and trends in the field. The second, a vertical rupture, separates the cognitive/neuroscience research approaches from the humanistic approaches. The third, a diagonal rupture, segregates researchers from practitioners. We used Yurevich's analysis of the psychology ruptures to help us think about ruptures in SLA/T and how these are reflected in the SI. We believe that the ruptures in two of the three axes, horizontal and diagonal, are more clearly represented in the SI, while the vertical axis less so, with the possible exception of the contrast between Western, or more accurately, Anglo-American quantitative-based scientific research and Ortega's call for decolonialization of research practices. While many psychologists have described the crisis in their field, most have not proposed a clear way to resolve the situation. One psychologist who did offer a resolution was L. S. Vygotsky, whose extended analysis was produced in 1926, even before he developed his own psychological theory (see Vygotsky, 1997a). Although he addressed theory proliferation, lack of terminological agreement, and theory practice/segregation, Vygotsky also brought to center stage a concern reflected in the subtitle of his text, A Methodological Investigation, in which he proposed that any scientific theory must first and foremost be conceived as a methodological system. Here he is not referring to research procedures but to a theory of scientific cognition (Toomela, 2014). In other words, the cognitive orientation of researchers affects the kinds of questions they ask, theories they propose to answer their questions, and technical procedures they deploy to assess the validity of their theories. Methodological orientation mediates the relationship between high-level theoretical speculation and low-level empirical research.1 In the SI, we identify at least three different methodological orientations. One we believe reflects Dafermos's (2021, p. 357–358) description of a metaphysical “way of thinking [italics in original] that separates things from each other (…) based on the examination of things as isolated from each other” and also isolated “from interconnections with other things.” This way of thinking Toomela (2017) called logical science, which assumes that causality is a linear cause > effect relationship that privileges quantitative analysis of covariance between variables as addressed in Sasaki's contribution to the SI. Toomela (2010) noted that both Pearson (1902) and Thurstone (1935), the inventor of factor analysis, understood that quantitative analysis expresses covariation appearances and not internal mechanisms that underlies external behaviors. As an example of logical thinking in SLA research, we consider a well-known study by Ellis (2005) that attempted to distinguish between implicit and explicit knowledge among L2 learners of English. The learners completed a series of tasks designed to elicit either implicit or explicit knowledge of 17 grammatical features of English. The relevant tasks with regard to implicit knowledge were a timed grammaticality judgment, an oral narrative, and an elicited imitation task. Using factor analysis, Ellis (2005) concluded that these three tasks measured implicit knowledge. According to Paradis (2009), however, most late L2 learners rely on explicit knowledge supported by the neurological declarative memory system. With practice learners are able to access this knowledge automatically, but this, according to Paradis is not the same type of automaticity that occurs with implicit learning subserved by the procedural memory system, which is automatic and inaccessible to conscious inspection as when children acquire their L1. It is quite possible, therefore, that the observed performance of the learners classified as stemming from implicit knowledge could have resulted from accelerated access to explicit knowledge. In other words, we cannot assume an isomorphic relationship between observed performance and the psychological processes that underlies it. Indeed, beyond SLA/T and psychology, natural sciences employing this mode of thinking have found themselves in a situation of the same data set supporting multiple theoretical interpretations, a challenge referred to as the underdetermination of theory by evidence (see Stanford, 2009). A possible way of resolving such dilemmas is through identifying forms of evidence that can determine which theory provides the best explanation (see below). In the example of implicit knowledge and memory in L2, one could conduct a behavioral experiment, as Ellis did, along with an ERP component which should indicate which memory system (procedural or declarative) is subserving the responses of the learners. Opposing logical thinking is the thinking reflected in Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (CDST) discussed in Lowie's contribution in which it is assumed that complex systems “consist of an infinite number of changing components” (Atkinson et al., 2025b, p. 53), all of which make an individual's language development “unique” (p. 54). The problem we see with this perspective, which we cannot address with the detail it deserves here, is that it is unclear how one could produce knowledge with any degree of confidence given the infinity of potential connections assumed to operate in complex systems. No matter how many connections one there is one determine what something As Toomela p. can be by an number of other things that are external to but can be in many not knowledge but would be on knowledge that some state of is (Toomela, p. such as from or the that will a This is not to that knowledge is and cannot be by new and this is how science The point is that we need to produce in the first that can be according to how well they for findings and to Given its methodological one can appreciate that not this were the it is to how would be possible, on the to in the which is possible of the (Toomela, Moreover, it would be to for the consequences of their and what would be the nature of the same to the same results A methodological orientation in the SI is In their to the SI, the that least three of the are (p. Although Yurevich a positive of in psychology, of among the various psychological schools, he did not believe that the of psychological (p. and p. SLA theories they are on as according to these when some L2 researchers attempted to with of (see & Vygotsky and each negative in For Vygotsky it was with scientific p. it can in p. as with to theory with p. argued that is for the of that its a sense of and an for scientific In three the SI contributors to thinking (p. p. and p. we are to evidence of in the is a for internal as the of As Toomela (2017) it the for orientation that to three questions to a what are the that the what are the among the and what are the of the In this we need to point out that the from & cited by the (Atkinson et al., p. to the effect that and practice are two of the same was as a of between the two of the practice It was not to for the that have for and the SI the contributors address the of their for a that we see as Indeed, as much as the contributors to practice into the of second language research, the that each first the theoretical and research orientation of its by of its a of as the in SLA/T. In our the is particularly in the following comment from the and practice have different et al., p. a that we do not with and that we see as clearly at with a We to this in our problem to be what psychologists had to is terminological when it to and This each is akin to a 1997a). Given that the of science is to the of it is not to but to in a and we are in of that we can perceive through it is for science to what is beyond the of which is a process that not on the methodological orientation of but also on the terminology used to and 1997a). For the in SLA/T for but do all researchers language in the same In the SI, we at least two different one from theory and one from theory and and in a language that is an essential of the through which we and with the and it that of have in their own p. both theories be are the consequences of these two of language for research and most for can the be It on which there seems to be a lack of agreement is not so much with regard to its but as to it is relevant for The and et al., p. to the of with regard to between and L2 when it to on a language The however, to that language learning is complex to be a number of or can learning (Atkinson et al., 2025b, p. A is reflected in the of and et al., p. of the The at least when it to linear The SI contributors and research they do not the of each to theory or research For instance, in SLA/T to such as and more as in psychology, researchers to these are even the other researchers assume that of interest can be understood in natural they which as Toomela is to what in and some of of what do in the to language at most of but not knowledge of the processes that (Toomela, access these mechanisms in This is not an for quantitative research with but is an for with as in psychology to and which was to the of Anglo-American for According to particularly in and what referred to as a research approach with the as the of understood as matter but an on the that less p. The of by theory was thinking and the psychological mechanisms that observed of is the are and through a series of with a of procedures are the an understanding of the psychological processes has been p. something that in quantitative for instance, a study cited in designed to a the to L2 learners by a word to a The study the validity of two one that agreement would be to acquire for would word with the the the the study for the based on the a of at the and found agreement word that more analysis along the by the the process is to be The of as in the is that it researchers to study processes as in the sciences (Toomela, 2014). not but from a theoretical that the to their through among these are most of such a is able to access to what would A type of was developed by Vygotsky, which he referred to as the or the of through which the process of interest is are given a that is beyond their to out but at the same time they are provided with such as or to the which they can deploy to their performance in order to the task. Dynamic is a of this In in for the of of beyond the of which that have developed and that are by in tasks that such do not of that are in the process of for learners that they are to on their own learners when they are (e.g., and the into their by the of a problem as well as how learners are to more In this the in the are brought into to improve and language provided an of what can be through when he L2 learners of with In from the of and teachers to as a between the and the with a by an from a of how the learners whose performance on tasks was quite out to have different when was each in their but not the The observed the that each One that had that the was even an and to it in a that was of the and was able to identify some of the had its but it to the forms and was not in all the its A that on for which to much as did in with was different from of As a or implicit of was not to a for between the two Indeed, when to a for that to one and it that this was what it is to any such a in practice to the by in which he used to by or by or the relationship among The issue of et al., p. between theory and practice to the of what we see as the most the of and to our While the SI contributors acknowledge this they do not its for both knowledge and theory and practice indeed have it seems to be the that the special this of and the possibility of building what SLA/T knowledge is for and it should This of occurs when the field to on are our to to or to the of knowledge SLA/T research processes or that improve our to cognitive social or The while and these crucial questions by to the of common ground and without first and Although the focus of our commentary on the SI, we that the and potential consequences of the crisis beyond the of the and of The more the field of and without mechanisms for resolving we be for our own language language language and all who could from the knowledge we to these in and without and clear from the field, make more about language education based on and SLA/T for its knowledge and their it that we could to into isolated and while that we all in one way or another, such as the of L2 learning and the and of language education it we need to do of L2 education is L2 L2 is for L2 L2 learning the field of SLA is to make a for its and to The nature of development the between research and practice is not the of scientific research as of the of science with no effect on the of the p. the the tasks and as the of as its It how to the and how to formulate the the and the in the same the process of development and of in a most essential p. the of psychology must the of p. In his of language education in the p. to the between and psychological with theory to development not on the and of but on their knowledge of how to the social of the to language development According to to of natural approaches to language in the understood learning in as different process language learning in the p. a at with that by the SI contributors in their synergies (p. which seems to that should not be from or as a of are of and as such are social activity however, they are indeed forms given that they or should that do not in p. two of by psychologists and to in the on the is with with knowledge not through in most other that a and level of development not in other of It is for this that Vygotsky education as a activity of provides learners with for thinking and in the in that they would not have access to in other This on the of teachers and the to be at with that of the contributors to the SI. we find of a that should be as to their own and and with their own approaches to learning that teachers should According to the that the to their own learning at the of is a of a of that learners of which is with new knowledge. This of language education is by the that the SI contributors offer no for what can be when are not learners and when their and are to the point to their own they would to their and of their as called for by et al., p. of our research and of our synergies the answer to questions of how are or how education in our no such it is clear that a of different is each of one and to the of how to and how to In the teachers must their own based on their own in the in which they are et al., p. of and the proliferation of consider the on teachers across the various theoretical represented in the SI. a teachers would need to by themselves on the that their given in a given as well as themselves and their and to and et al., p. they are to approaches to language (Atkinson et al., 2025b, p. while from theoretical that offer of language and learning Given this of and the of we the can language education be when the field cannot on what what or what teachers should in on teachers need to about language how to assess learning or when and how to most with knowledge of language and cannot or The field teachers who lack a clear sense of their and forms of they to the This to the and of the et al., through a to what in language what language teachers have on their and by what language have to in language teachers to language learning et al., & & two L2 and et a for a theory of SLA that would do for SLA what for a theory would do for A theory not it is theory about how different of the same are to one (Toomela, p. It which or are and or that are but not In this both and argued that must be a component of a theory as et p. characterized it, is a that the internal of language While that the relationship between theory and practice is a he that to be the for (p. A theory also and the findings of the special theories and on the various and processes in In the of this would all agreement on a of as well as other such as the of and an understanding of the It would also address the development of as well as agreement on the of A theory would also address such as what is the et al., p. (Atkinson et al., 2025b, p. or et al., p. of it et al., p. (Atkinson et al., 2025b, p. or et al., p. all some of of or some other The theory would address the methodological issue of thinking about the SLA for one way other (Toomela, A theory would determine the of analysis and of for understanding these procedures do not access to A theory would also help the field determine T should be into as by et so that the is understood to research on the of on the our researchers to have not of a theory of Ellis at least for a theory it researchers a for of and and provides a for the of L2 the same he the that such a it were to of an number of such as proposed by would be and is therefore, is a and that for the of as in p. guidelines for theory As an step to a the ruptures and not the common ground by theories, need to be addressed in p. in which the differences are and et al., p. as p. the must in The issue by and p. is an attempt to open of SLA theories that of common ground as well as incommensurabilities across theories with the of an of for SLA that has the potential to move our field beyond its of The of their is that the did not of the theories brought into but were by of a which their of theories. approach to resolving theoretical differences that in with building a theory and that has been in cognitive research is et al., in research, theoretical such as the neurological that of the theories designed a series of to determine the of of the theories. The were by resulting in an that supported the validity of one of the theories. This is an approach in SLA Indeed, of theory and Theory are in the early of the possibility of in to determine the by can or cannot be through procedures based on The forward that there is indeed a crisis in SLA and that this state of presents both danger and opportunity. The danger in and the opportunity in the possibility of a more and field. It is our that this not the of in the SI, but the of analysis that can distinguish between theoretical and by methodological for and that the of the can the field move beyond its state of crisis a more scientific of and the learning and of second in and all the danger of from science to at which point what we how we how we is to a matter of

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Making time count: Kairos as temporal, methodological, and ethical innovation in qualitative applied linguistics research

  Research Methods in Applied Linguistics · 2025-04-08

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  Responding to calls to interrogate the role of temporality in applied linguistics research methods, this paper explores the utility and value of kairos as a temporal and methodological logic in qualitative inquiry. In contrast to the predominant understanding of time as chronos , the objective passage of clock time, kairos represents the qualitative experience of time by the individual as personally significant moments that constitute turning points and major transitions in development. To illustrate how kairos can be productively integrated in qualitative research, we present a case study of a research project on faculty development in the context of English as a Medium of Instruction that was designed to create change in participants’ instructional decision making and practices. The analysis illustrates how the cultivation of kairos , defined as opportune, relevant, and meaningful experiences for participants, guided the study design and implementation, and enabled faculty-participants to implement new teaching practices to the benefit of their students’ engagement and learning. We conclude by considering the temporal, methodological, and ethical implications of attending to time as kairos , and by advocating for the potential benefits of a kairic orientation to qualitative inquiry in applied linguistics.

  PublisherDOI

• Becoming a Vygotskian Language Teacher Educator and Researcher through Interventionist Inquiry

  2025-10-14

  book-chapter1st authorCorresponding

  This chapter explores my development as a language teacher educator and researcher by carrying out a qualitative interventionist dissertation project. Focusing on interactions with a focal teacher-participant, Sofia, I demonstrate how, in enacting my positionality as a Vygotskian language teacher educator, I had to respond to her specific prior instructional experiences and future ESL teaching practice. This analysis calls into relief how my own development and reflexivity as an emerging language teacher educator and researcher were entangled with Sofia’s unique individual history and professional development. From this, I advocate for the value of conceptualizing our roles as language teacher educators as not only informed by theory but also as a source of research into the intentional creation of teacher development.

  PublisherDOI

• Examining the Role of Language Teacher Educator Intentionality in Leveraging Novice Teacher Emotions as Sites for Professional Development:

  Channel View Publications eBooks · 2025-07-08

  book-chapter1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• Language Teacher Educator Expertise: A Vygotskian Sociocultural Frame for Teacher Educator Development 

  Second Language Teacher Education · 2025-11-01

  articleSenior author

  We take up the issue of what constitutes language teacher educator expertise. We propose a Vygotskian sociocultural theoretical (VSCT) informed tripartite frame of innovation, intentionality, and intervention to both document and develop expertise. The frame prompts teacher educators to design context-specific innovations that embody a clear ideal, engage in theoretically grounded reasoning for the choices they make in deliberately and ethically enacting their pedagogy, and empirically examine the consequences of their pedagogy by provoking and tracking transformations in teacher reasoning and pedagogy. We reject a static view of expertise as being a set of individual or context-specific traits, dispositions, or knowledge. Instead, our tripartite frame operationally defines expertise as the praxis-based activities of second language teacher education (SLTE) pedagogy and the transformative impact this pedagogy has on learners of language teaching. We describe two innovations that language teacher educators who engage with VSCT have conducted in different instructional contexts and with different teacher populations. We detail how these language teacher educators took up the tripartite frame as a conceptual tool to motivate the design and enactment of their interventions and provide empirical evidence of the developmental consequences for the language teacher educators and the language teachers/tutors with whom they work. We close by offering significant pedagogical and methodological implications for VSCT-informed praxis-based SLTE pedagogy. This highly theorized practical tripartite frame, we believe, creates a workable tool to imagine, think through, and enact praxis-based SLTE pedagogy while simultaneously creating opportunities for the development of language teacher educator expertise.

  PublisherDOI

• Redefining faculty preparedness in English-medium instruction

  Journal of English-Medium Instruction · 2025-04-08

  article

  Abstract Responding to calls for greater attention to the structure, substance, and scope of English-medium instruction (EMI) faculty professional preparation programs and their impact on teacher instructional practices, this paper explores the design, implementation, and impact of a professional development initiative at a technical university in Taiwan. Based on needs analysis findings and grounded in Vygotskian sociocultural theory, the program was designed and implemented to support faculty development through engendering new forms of teacher reasoning and instructional action. Exemplifying this process of change, an in-depth case study of a faculty-participant’s learning shows how they developed new ways of reasoning about their instructional decisions and teaching their disciplinary content. Analysis of instructional coaching sessions, faculty-produced teaching artifacts, and classroom observations demonstrates how the faculty-participant translated individualized, concept-based instructional support into innovations in their course design and in-class engagement with students. The results foreground the value of conceptualizing EMI faculty development as an individualized, longitudinal process in which responsive instructional support is a catalyst for reasoned, pedagogically sound innovations. More generally, this study offers an alternative definition of EMI professional support that moves beyond preparedness and locates development -the process of creating qualitative change in teacher practices and reasoning-at its core.

  PublisherDOI

Frequent coauthors

• Stella Ng

  University of Toronto

  4 shared

• Brett A. Diaz

  The Wilson Centre

  3 shared

• Paula R. Golombek

  2 shared

• Meredith Doran

  2 shared

• Karen E. Johnson

  2 shared